examples

Examples

knowledge/ is a complete, conformant bundle you can read end to end in a few minutes. It is the worked example from the profile's Appendix A, kept as real files. Run the shipped automated gate from the repository root:

okfp validate examples/knowledge

With a Dart SDK instead of the installed binary, dart run wayfinder_cli:wayfinder validate examples/knowledge is equivalent.

Success proves OKF conformance and the deterministic Profile 2026.2 rules only. The command reports Judgment Rules as UNASSESSED; complete Profile conformance also requires the contextual Profile Review defined by the canonical skill.

This is not this repository's adopted bundle. Profile conformance does not fix repository location or bundle count; Concepta adoption places its working bundle at knowledge/. This illustrative bundle lives under examples/ so it cannot be mistaken for the standard's own durable knowledge.

The story it tells

A client raises a request during a demo. The recording platform expires in 30 days, so the transcript is mirrored. An analysis follows. The request is specified in GitHub.

knowledge/
  index.md                            # Root index, carries okf_version
  log.md                              # Knowledge lifecycle events only
  profile.md                          # Profile and OKF versions
  types.md                            # All standards plus one registered extension
  actors.md                           # Actors with dated history and unknown affiliation
  reporting/
    index.md                          # Generated semantic navigation
    include-pdf-annotations.md        # Request
    pdf-export-feasibility.md         # Analysis
  ways-of-working/
    index.md
    relationship-labels.md            # Guide defining the project label Assessed by
  references/
    index.md
    2026-07-30-reporting-demo-transcript.md   # Mirrored, immutable
    annotation-layout.json                    # Referenced non-Markdown asset

What to look for:

• A source event is not a concept. The demo produced a request, and an analysis followed, but there is no interpreted record of the event itself. No Interaction Record was written, because its combined context was not independently durable — the request links straight to the mirrored source artifact (§4.3).
• Execution stays external. The request carries Specified by toward a GitHub issue. The issue's state is never copied into the bundle (§7.3).
• Relationships are body context over ordinary OKF edges. Each labelled bullet has one target. The request's project-specific Assessed by label is defined once in a durable Guide and produces only a non-blocking advisory. The analysis deliberately links to a not-yet-written pagination contract: OKF still exposes that untyped edge, and the Profile reports the unresolved target only as a non-blocking advisory (§7, §13, §14.1).
• Provenance is per-claim. The request's one substantive sentence carries a footnote keyed to a sources[].id, so the claim points at the transcript rather than the concept vaguely citing it (§6.1).
• A mirror is a source concept, not an interpreted outcome. The transcript preserves an artifact from the interaction; an Interaction Record would interpret its combined context. It is mirrored only because a durable concept cites it and the recording expires, after confirming the content is suitable for repository visibility — pull-based, never merely because a meeting occurred (§12).
• Assets stay assets. The layout sample is referenced through sources, has no concept frontmatter, and appears under the Assets index group with a path-derived label and no invented description (§9, §12).
• types.md catches invention. Meeting Transcript is not in the standard vocabulary, so it needed a row. That is the mechanism that stops a typo'd type from passing as a new kind of thing. All fourteen standard rows remain seeded even when unused, so authors see the canonical choices before inventing an extension (§5.2).
• Affiliation is time-aware and never trust. The transcription process has non-overlapping internal and vendor periods, while an undated source author stays explicitly unknown. The July generation event resolves to the internal row; none of this changes the OKF actor strings or their prefix-derived trust tiers (§6.1.1).
• Absence of verified is a signal, not a defect. Six of the seven concepts are unverified and the verifier reports it as information, never as a finding — the only way to clear such a report would be to record a verification that did not happen (§6.2, §14.1).

Why there is a small subject directory

The request and analysis share the reporting subject, so both live in reporting/. Two concepts are enough when the subject is genuine: a count cannot prove or disprove the placement, and waiting for a third would create avoidable path churn.

There is no requests/ or analyses/ either, and there never will be: those name kinds, and kind is carried by type. Reading every request as a set is an index filtered by type, not a directory (§13).

The directory was not seeded speculatively: the two durable concepts provide the corpus from which the subject was observed. Its index groups concepts under exact registered types in registry order, while the root index derives the directory label from reporting/ and supplies no authored description. The authored log is history, not another generated projection.